About your Search

20121128
20121206
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
spoke thursday about the future of u.s. foreign policy. the syrian civil war, and other challenges facing the middle east. this came at a forum hosted by "foreign-policy" magazine. she also answer questions. this is an hour. [applause] >> madam secretary, today we solve all your problems. nothing left to worry about, really. actually, the office of policy planning and the foreign policy group made a bet we could bring together leaders from inside government from leaders outside government to have a real discussion about the future of american foreign policy. is there to say based on the conversation we had today that that has paid off. that is especially thanks to say paanalysts and participants to mid really impressive than insightful interventions over the course of the day. i also want to give a special thank you to people at the foreign-policy group and policy planning office, who were the heart and soul of putting today together. if you've given a quick round of applause. -- you could give them a quick round of applause. [applause] we made a second bet that david could shine a
come together. on foreign policy issues, we shouldn't be playing politics. >> let me ask you, senator, if we can, let's go to the bottom line. can they block her? can she be can confirmed? >> the confirmation process is a very serious process t involves hearings and she should be judged on her record and what comes out at the hearings. i think so many senators have already prejudged her on information that i don't think is relevant to her capability to be secretary of state or whatever confirmation appointment that the president were to make. i would hope that the senators would withhold, allow the process to go forward. i think she has an outstanding record to present to the american people. >> are you willing to fight for that record? are democrats ready to dig in and fight if the president chooses to nominate ambassador rice? >> we want president obama's team in place as soon as possible. he won the election. we believe his team is entitled to the courtesy of the united states senate. there should be a processed and she should be judged on her record. >> senator ben cardin, thank y
in his foreign policy. >> ari, what's the talk in massachusetts about a possible senate race of john kerry because there's still speculation he might go to defense if he didn't go to state. >> theol
confidence in her and if he chooses to go with her, it will be continuity in his foreign policy. >> ari, what's the talk in massachusetts about a possible senate race of john kerry because there's still speculation he might go to defense if he didn't go to state. >> the folks i know who work for john kerry are much more focused on the fit for the state department because that is of course what he oversees on his committee.
, the person he thinks will best help him shape and project this country's foreign policy. just as important, the senate has the duty to advise and consent to his decision. if senators see a serious problem with a nominee, they have a right and duty to speak and vote that way. someone keeps telling the press that president obama prefers to nominate u.n. ambassador susan rice, and as long as that person is not the president and does so under ground rules that protect his or her identity, we are condemned to this preventative war we're watching in washington. one side attacking while no one outside the gates of the white house knows what the president intends. i take president obama at his official word. he has not decided whose name to send to the senate, and with that we go to the first of our two senatorial guests, senator bob corker, republican of tennessee. senator corker, i have laid it out as best i can. you senators have a right and a duty to decide, to advise and consent or not to a president's nominee. isn't this strange that we're having the debate about the qualifications for a can
'll read an excerpt from foreign policy. with the exception of syria she's won every major battle she's fought at u.n., imposes sanctions on north korea, sending a peacekeeping force, and warding off a full-scale war of sudan and south sudan. you're talking about qualifications for secretary of state, that qualifies her more than reading talking points. >> and at the beginning of this she was one of the few administration officials along with hillary clinton who pushed reluctant people inside the white house, including tom donnell lynn to interview in libya, a position senator republicans took at the time. >> human rights is a key issue and done a lot at u.n. with regard to women, disabled people. and i worked with her in the clinton administration. she was, you know, very tenacious. very intelligent woman. very strong willed. i guess one of the things, as a woman i don't like, some of the criticism of her, if this was a man, it -- these would be positive attributes. >> exactly. >> as a woman, well you know she's feisty. >> or they -- when mccain said she's not very brought, this is s
a radio interview and he expounded on some interesting theories about the president's foreign policy. take a listen. >> the only way you can explain the horrendous decisions that were so completely wrong-headed would be if this administration had a bunch of muslim brotherhood members giving them advice. >> so, bob, it's pretty clear the president has lots of people in the muslim brotherhood working for him like all thots those guys that killed osama bin laden and what about those who command the drone strikes? >> that whack job with texas is the person who went after the woman who works for hillary clinton. this is the kind of conspiracy mongering you would hope was over after this election. instead, it may get worse. and it may take two or three presidential thumpings for the republican party to come to terms with the fact that it can't be anti-immigrant, can't come across as anti-women, and it's never going to get the vote of young voters as long as it's anti-gay. these are hard questions. bill clinton, and matt is right about this, bill clinton brought the democratic party -- it wasn't
, the administration chose that particular foreign policy leader to go on sunday shows as opposed to other folks in the administration. my hunch is -- this is really just my guess. it isn't something i've coordinated. >> no talking points with the intelligence? >> no talking points. my view of it is that this was obviously a terrible incident where americans were killed. and there was clear sort of lack of full coordination and communication between elements of the executive branch. and they made a choice to have her be the sort of face forward for the administration on responding to questions about what had happened and why and when and where. i would be joining calls for an investigation and a joint committee and so forth if the administration were stonewalling and saying we won't be accountable for this. we won't tell you what happened. we won't get into the background. that's not been my experience. the senate foreign relations committee on which i serve unanimously sent a letter to the administration asking that we be briefe
that he has on foreign policy in the republican senate caucus? mika and i talked to so many people over the past two, three years that say we want, republican senators, we want out of afghanistan but, you know what, we just sort of stay out of john's way. how many times have we heard that? >> a lot. it's disturbing. >> we hear it all the time. they stay out of his way. are they going to blindly follow and, again, i love and respect senator mccain, but i don't want my party to blindly follow him over a cliff on this battle especially if it's a personal one. >> well, on this battle it may be a personal one. i think the answer to your broader question is that republicans will continue to respect and follow his advice and syria is the next big issue that he is pounding away on. he was at a forum at the museum yesterday and crying out for american leadership on syria which means more engagement, more involvement. so there are a lot of big issues that he has huge influence on because of his experiences, his personal history. this issue i'm not so sure they'll follow him on. two of the three s
things. they don't believe in the same way to prosperity. they don't believe in the same way in foreign policy. they can agree that they love america. we do know, in fact, that there has been some democratic interest in one governor romney's ideas, which was to put a cap on deductions. just say, okay, you can only take, you know, this much of your income, that kind of thing. can i see that there might be a discussion about that, but the specifics are not going to be dealt with between mitt romney and president obama. that ship sailed. this has to do with the president and basically the republicans on the house side, so i see this more as a photo op. i guess we're fwog get a still picture and a read-out about their nice, cordal meeting. i'm not saying nothing could happen. i just think it's hard to figure what it would be. there's ain't lot of love between them here. they have to make nice. how do they begin, do you think, to work in the same direction, to kind of put that aside? how much of this relationship really needs repairing? >> i don't know that either one of them feel it needs r
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)